Ever since the Hariri murder, many in Lebanon began to see that the "resistance" to Israel is not the only kind of resistance out there. Hizbullah has found it increasingly hard to market their "resistance" as the only morally acceptable form of struggle. Their open alliance with the Assad regime against a considerable segment of the population was a wake up call to those who, until March 8 when Hizbullah
thanked the Assad regime in a massive demonstration, were willing to let Hizbullah be Lebanon's only "legitimate resistance", and Israel the only enemy.
What happened since the Syrian withdrawal, and the latest war, was the gradual descent of Hizbullah from a high plateau engineered by Assad and local elements into the dungeons of domestic politics. This war may not have destroyed Nasrallah's rockets, but it flushed their holiness down the chute of the Lebanese sectarian system. Hizbullah's weapons, once holy and beyond criticism, are now accused of being foreign tools, and regarded with suspicion.
"Sayyed Hassan, rest your mind, I will not reach an agreement with you. When you separate yourself from the Syrian leadership, I will possibly hold a dialogue with you," the Chouf MP said. "The strong, just and capable state is the state of law, one law, with weapons in the hands of the Lebanese Army, and the decision of war and peace is that of the Lebanese state," Jumblatt argued. The PSP leader noted that Nasrallah had not mentioned the Taif Accord in his speech. "They already wanted to eliminate Taif so the country would be an open arena for the Islamic Republic's ambitions in the region, which also eases the return of the Syrian regime," he said.
The "party's" monopoly over all matters resistance and sacrifice is slowly ending. With the Syrian master gone, Lebanon's other self-proclaimed "resistance", which at one point in its history allied itself with Israel, has left the post-Taef Syrian prison. Given Hizbullah's total disregard for Lebanese sovereignty and alliance with the Assad regime, can anyone today deny Samir Geagea and the Lebanese forces the right to claim they too were fighting for Lebanon?
"They said the resistance had protected Lebanon from falling into a civil war ... We say that Lebanese leaders and people are the ones who kept Lebanon away from a civil war," Geagea said. "We are the resistance and we will always be. As we were heroes of the military resistance, we will also be heroes of the peaceful political resistance."
Geagea also said that no weapon would stop his party's calls for Hizbullah to disarm. "They say that there is no army in the world capable of making them drop their weapons ... We say that there is no weapon that can make us accept this fact," he said.
I may not be a fan of Geagea, and I personally will never forgive him and the Lebanese Forces, for crimes and terror that affected me and my family during the war. For the longest time, I could not even get myself to quote him on this blog. That's my own problem, and I am sure other Lebanese have problems with other parties. But I cannot give myself the moral high ground anymore, not when the entire country is at stake. It takes a lot of courage to unfreeze time when you've lived through horrors. It is my opinion that Nasrallah is a criminal for keeping us all in his freezer.
Hizbullah constantly markets itself as something better than the militias that reigned during the civil war. Since that war ended, Hizbullah repackaged itself as a resistance movement and placed itself on a higher moral ground, above all other militias and political movements in the country. The alleged "purity" of this militia was employed to advance the notion that their political representatives are honest and above all others. Even Michel Aoun believes that, and has defended Hizbullah's allegedly untainted record in Lebanon in a recent interview with Elaph. Aoun, like many others, is delusional, for Hizbullah did use their weapons against other Lebanese. I lived in a Beirut neighborhood that saw some of the fiercest fighting between Amal and Hizbullah. In fact, armed clashes between Amal and Hizbullah continued until recently (somehow, these clashes are seen as friendly clashes between brothers or some nonsense like that). Many southern villages are divided along Hizbullah and Amal lines, and there have been numerous incidents that were largely ignored by the media.
The "new" post-Taef Hizbullah as a purely resistance movement was the only way Hafez allowed it to remain after the war, since he probably did not favor an openly Iranian project in the country, and he wanted a pressure card against Israel. There is no doubt in my mind that Hizbullah would have remained a purely Iranian project had it not been for the Syrians at the time. During the last years of his reign, and after his son Bashar inherited power, Syria got pushed into Iran's orbit and Hizbullah was further empowered, becoming the political and military monster they now are. My point is, Hizbullah is not so pure, and if had semblance of purity after the war, it wasn't by choice.
In short, Hizbullah is not better than the others. They did kill other Lebanese in the past and their "strategy" continues to kill them in the present. While most parties now look beyond the war, and are making amends, Hizbullah is still stuck in one that is partly of its making.
The only way to move is forward:
Saniora added that "the Lebanese don't want to go back to the way we were before," answering Nasrallah's insinuations that the resistance would respond to any Israeli aggression. He said that the army's deployment in the south was permanent and would not be reversed. "There is no place prohibited for it and when the army sees any weapon even in the hands of the resistance, it will confiscate it."